Wild Diamond Draft EIR Volume 2

Draft Environmental Impact Report Wild Diamond Vineyards Project

State Clearinghouse No. 2016022084

Volume 2: Appendices

Prepared for: Wild Diamond Vineyards, LLC

For submittal to: Lake County Community Development Department

A Notice

of

Pre

para

tio

n

B NOP S

co

pin

g C

om

men

ts

COUNTY OF LAKE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division Courthouse - 255 N. Forbes Street Lakeport, California 95453 Telephone 707/263-2221 FAX 707/263-2225

Date: March 16, 2016 To: Review and Oversight Agencies From: Lake County Community Development Department Subject: Agency Scoping Session for the Preparation a Draft Environmental Impact

Report for the Proposed Wild Diamond Vineyards Project Wild Diamond Vineyards, LLC (applicant) proposes to plant approximately 80 acres of new vineyards, construct a winery with the capacity to produce up to 52,800 cases of wine per year, build a wine tasting room that will be open to the public, and create an interpretive center. The property upon which the project is located encompasses approximately 323 acres with the development activities occurring on approximately 90 acres. The project site is located just north of the community of Hidden Valley Lake, approximately 1.3 miles east of State Route 29 and adjacent to Spruce Grove Road.

Agency Scoping Meeting The County is holding an Agency scoping meeting in conjunction with the Applicant on the Wild Diamond Vineyard project site. The meeting will be outdoors and there is no meeting space that is accessible to persons with disabilities. The specific purpose of this meeting is to provide onsite review of the project for Agencies with review and permitting responsibilities as part of the EIR review process and future permitting of any approved project, and to hear comments related to development of the EIR.

Date: March 31, 2016 Time: 10:00 AM Location: 15087 Spruce Grove Road, Middletown, CA 95461

If possible, please respond to Peggy Barthel, Lake County Planning Department by phone at (707) 263-2221, or by email at [email protected] to confirm your attendance.

Providing Comments

Agencies and interested parties may provide written comments related to the Project to Lake County within 30 days of the date of the NOP, as mandated by State law. Comments should be provided no later than 5 PM on March 31, 2016. Comments need to be addressed to:

Lake County Community Development, Planning Department Attn: Peggy Barthel 255 North Forbes Street, Lakeport, CA 95453 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Project Mgr.

By Date

Project No.ScaleDate

WILD DIAMOND VINEYARDSVICINITY MAP

15087 & 15807 SPRUCE GROVE ROADLOWER LAKE, CALIFORNIA

APN 13-060-04,07,09,10,11,& 1215-259.1

02/29/16NTS

CAM 02/29/2016

FEB. 29, 2016

STAMP AND SIGNATURE:

DRAWN BY :CHECKED BY:

DATE:SCALE:PROJECT NO :

SHEET:

# XXXXX/XX/XX

SHEET NUMBER: OF 4

16-259.1

REVISIONS:-

USE

PER

MIT

APP

LIC

ATIO

NW

ILD

DIA

MO

ND

VIN

EYAR

DS

1508

7, 1

5807

, 156

63 &

155

91 S

PRU

CE

GR

OVE

RO

ADM

IDD

LETO

WN

, CAL

IFO

RN

IA

APN

013

-060

-04,

07,

09,

10,

11,

& 1

2

PREL

IMIN

ARY

- FO

R R

EVIE

W O

NLY

1UP1

CAMRRH

1"=200'

OVE

RAL

L SI

TE P

LAN

From: Peggy BarthelTo: Sheya, Tanya@WildlifeSubject: RE: Comments on the Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Wild Diamond Vineyards

Project (SCH#2016022084)Date: Monday, March 28, 2016 11:09:03 AMAttachments: image001.png

Thank you for your comments. Will you be attending the Agency Scoping Session on Thursday? Peggy Barthel707-263-2221 From: Sheya, Tanya@Wildlife [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 10:50 AMTo: Peggy BarthelCc: Wildlife R2 CEQASubject: Comments on the Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the WildDiamond Vineyards Project (SCH#2016022084) Dear Ms. Barthel: foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has reviewed the Notice of Preparation of anEnvironmental Impact Report for the Wild Diamond Vineyards Project (SCH#2016022084) . As a trustee for Californias fish and wildlife resources, CDFW has jurisdiction over the conservation,protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologicallysustainable populations of those species (Fish & G. Code, 1802). CDFW may also act as aResponsible Agency (Cal. Code Regs., 21069) for a project where it has discretionary approvalpower under the California Endangered Species Act (Fish & G. Code, 2050 et seq.) and the Lake andStreambed Alteration Program (Fish & G. Code, 1600 et seq.). CDFW also administers the NativePlant Protection Act, Natural Community Conservation Program, and other provisions of the Fish andGame Code that afford protection to Californias fish and wildlife resources. CDFW offers the following comments and recommendations for this project in our role as a trusteeand responsible agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ALTERNATIVE ANALYSISThe proposed project includes the addition of approximately 80 acres of new vineyards; constructionof a winery, tasting room and interpretive center. The project description should include the whole action as defined in the California Code ofRegulations, title 14, section 15000 et seq. (CEQA Guidelines) section 15378 and should includeappropriate detailed exhibits disclosing the project area including temporary impacted areas such asaccess roads and staging areas.

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

As required by section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the CEQA document should includeappropriate range of reasonable and feasible alternatives that would attain most of the basic projectobjectives and avoid or minimize significant impacts to resources under CDFWs jurisdiction. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTINGCDFW recommends that the CEQA document includes a complete assessment of the existingbiological conditions within the project area including but not limited to the type, quantity andlocations of the habitats, flora and fauna. Adequate mapping and information regarding the surveyefforts should be included within the CEQA document. All surveys as well as the environmentalanalysis should be completed by qualified personnel with sufficient experience in the workperformed for the project. To identify a correct environmental baseline, the CEQA document should include a complete andcurrent analysis of endangered, threatened, candidate, and locally unique species. CEQA guidelinessection 15125, subdivision (c) requires lead agencies to provide special emphasis to sensitive habitatsand any biological resources that are rare or unique to the area. This includes, but is not limited tovernal pools, streambeds, riparian habitats, and open grasslands that are known to be present withinthe project boundaries or its vicinity. CDFW recommends that the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), as well as previousstudies performed in the area, be consulted to assess the potential presence of sensitive species andhabitats. Recent surveys for the different species that have the potential to be present within theproject limits and its vicinity shall be included within the CEQA document. Additional informationregarding survey protocols can be obtained by contacting CDFW. Species-specific surveys should be conducted in order to ascertain the presence of species with thepotential to be present within the project vicinity. CDFW recommends that the lead agency usesurvey protocols previously approved by CDFW and that an assessment for rare plants and rarenatural communities follow CDFWs 2009 Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to SpecialStatus Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. The guidance document is available here:http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/protocols_for_surveying_and_evaluating_impacts.pdf. IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURESThe CEQA document should clearly identify and describe all short-term, long-term, permanent, ortemporary impacts to biological resources under CDFWs jurisdiction, including all direct andforeseeable indirect impacts caused by the proposed project. The CEQA document should define the threshold of significance for each impact and describe thecriteria used to determine each threshold (CEQA Guidelines, 15064, subd. (f).) The CEQA documentmust demonstrate that the significant environmental impacts of the project were adequatelyinvestigated and discussed and it must permit the significant effects of the project to be consideredin the full environmental context. CDFW recommends the use of survey and monitoring protocols and guidelines available at:http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/survey_monitor.html. CDFW also recommends that the

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/protocols_for_surveying_and_evaluating_impacts.pdfhttp://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/survey_monitor.html

environmental documentation provide scientifically supported discussion and adequate avoidance,minimization, and/or mitigation measures to address the projects impact upon fish and wildlife andtheir habitat. CDFW recommends that the environmental documentation identify natural habitatsand provide a discussion of how the proposed project will affect their function and value. The CEQA document should incorporate mitigation performance standards that would ensure thatsignificant impacts are reduced as expected. Mitigation measures proposed in the CEQA documentshould be made a condition of approval of the project. Please note that obtaining a permit fromCDFW by itself with no other mitigation proposal may constitute mitigation deferral. Threatened, Endangered, Candidate SpeciesIf during the environmental analysis for the project, it is determined that the project may have thepotential to result in take, as defined in the Fish and Game Code, section 86, of a State-listedspecies, the CEQA document shall disclose an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) or a consistencydetermination (Fish & G. Code, 2080.1 & 2081) may be required prior to starting constructionactivities. The CEQA document must include all avoidance and minimization to reduce the impacts toa less than significant level. If impacts to listed species are expected to occur even with theimplementation of these measures, mitigation measures shall be proposed to fully mitigate theimpacts to State-listed species (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, 783.2, subd.(a)(8)). Rare PlantsCDFW recommends that analysis of potential habitat for special status plants is conducted for theproposed project. If it is determined that the site contains habitat for any special status plantspecies, protocol level surveys should be conducted. The timing and number of visits necessary toconduct a floristic survey should be determined by geographic location, the natural communitiespresent and the weather patterns of the year, with the understanding that more than one field visitor field season may be necessary to accurately survey the floristic diversity of a site and detect thepresence of special status plant taxa. The CDFW recommends that: Botanical surveys are floristic in nature (every plant taxon that occurs on a site is identified tothe taxonomic level necessary to determine rarity and listing status); Surveys are conducted in the field at the time of year when target plant taxa are both evidentand identifiable (usually during flowering or fruiting), and multiple visits to a site be made (e.g. inearly, mid, and late-season) to accurately survey the floristic diversity of the site and detect thepresence of all special status plant taxa that are evident and identifiable; and Nearby reference populations are visited whenever possible to determine if known specialstatus plant populations are evident and identifiable this year, and to obtain a visual image of thetarget species, associated habitat, and associated natural community. Reference populations maybe particularly important this year to ensure that the timing of surveys is appropriate and to helpsubstantiate negative findings in adverse conditions caused by drought.

More information on surveying for special status plant taxa can be found in CDFWs Protocols forSurveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and NaturalCommunities. Again, additional field seasons of surveys may be necessary to accurately survey thefloristic diversity of a site and substantiate negative findings. This may be particularly true whensurveying for annual or short-lived perennial plant taxa where an evident and identifiable referencepopulation could not be referenced. If any special status plants are found within the project area, measures should be taken to preventdisturbance to the species. Exclusion zones should be established around any identified special-status plants. In consultation with a qualified biologist, it should first be attempted to avoid effectsof project implementation on rare plants and protect their occurrences/populations. In the eventthat a special-status plant occurrence cannot be avoided by construction activities, consultation withthe Department, and/or other regulatory agencies, as applicable depending on the speciesregulatory status, should be conducted in order to establish appropriate mitigation measures. Ifsacrifice seed collection or transplantation are selected as appropriate mitigations, then thefollowing measures should apply: a) collect any mature seeds from the affected plants and storethem at an appropriate native plant nursery or comparable facility; b) upon the completion of work,redistribution of the seeds within the original location of the occurrence; c) establish performancestandards for survivorship, monitor and document the success rate of the transplanted individualsfor three consecutive growing seasons; d) if performance standards are not met, correctivemeasures should be implemented and monitoring and adaptive management continued until successcriteria are met. If, through consultation, it is determined that Ferris' milk-vetch plants cannot beavoided or protected, then an attempt should be made to relocate all Ferris' milk-vetch individuals. Plants that cannot be avoided during construction should be relocated to nearby suitable habitat. Ifrelocation is unsuccessful, consultation should occur again with the Department in order todetermine the cause of relocation failure and to establish appropriate corrective remedial measures. CDFW encourages early coordination to determine appropriate measures to offset project impactsand facilitate future permitting processes and to coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tocoordinate specific measures if federally-listed species are present within the project limits. Jurisdictional Delineation and WetlandsThe CEQA document should identify all the areas under CDFWs jurisdiction per section 1602 of theFish and Game Code. These areas include all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams,and lakes in the State and any habitats supported by these features such as wetlands and riparianhabitats. If these jurisdictional features are found within the project limits or its vicinity, the CEQAdocument should identify any potential impacts to these resources. The CEQA document shouldinclude a delineation of lakes, streams, and associated habitat that will be temporarily and/orpermanently impacted by the proposed project including an estimate of impact to each habitat type.Please note that the CDFW definition of wetlands as well as extent of the jurisdictional areas differfrom other agencies such the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Regional Water Quality ControlBoard. The CEQA document should identify the different jurisdictional areas present within theproject limits under each agency. If it is determined that the project would impact areas under CDFWs jurisdiction the CEQAdocument must propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to these

resources. Migratory Birds and Birds of PreyMigratory nongame native bird species are protected by international treaty under the FederalMigratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C., 703-712). CDFW implemented the MBTA byadopting the Fish and Game Code section 3513. Fish and Game Code sections 3503, 3503.5 and 3800provide additional protection to nongame birds, birds of prey, their nests and eggs. Potential habitatfor nesting birds and birds of prey is present within the project area. The proposed project shoulddisclose all potential activities that may incur a direct or indirect take to nongame nesting birdswithin the project footprint and its close vicinity. Appropriate avoidance, minimization, and/ormitigation measures to avoid take must be included in the CEQA document. Measures to avoid theimpacts should include species specific work windows, biological monitoring, installation of noiseattenuation barriers, etc. SUMMARYThe proposed project may have an impact to fish and/or wildlife habitat and should be evaluated insuch a manner to reduce its impacts to biological resources. Assessment of fees under PublicResources Code 21089 and as defined by FGC 711.4 is necessary. Fees are payable by the projectapplicant upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the lead agency. Pursuant to Public Resources Code 21092 and 21092.2, the Department requests writtennotification of proposed actions and pending decisions regarding the proposed project. Writtennotifications shall be directed to: California Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 2, 1701 NimbusRoad, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670. Thank you for considering our concerns for the proposed project and providing the opportunity tocomment. I am available for consultation regarding biological resources and strategies to minimizeimpacts. If you have questions please contact me by e-mail at [email protected] or byphone at (916) 358-2953. Sincerely,

T a n y a S h e y aEnvironmental Scientist

N o r t h C e n t r a l R e g i o n | H a b i t a t C o n s e r v a t i o n1 7 0 1 N i m b u s R o a d | R a n c h o C o r d o v a , C A 9 5 6 7 0P h o n e 9 1 6 . 3 5 8 . 2 9 5 3 | F a x 9 1 6 . 3 5 8 . 2 9 1 2T a n y a . S h e y a @ w i l d l i f e . c a . g o v Every Californian should conserve water. Find out how at:

mailto:[email protected]://www.wildlife.ca.gov/https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Regions/2https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Environmental-Reviewmailto:[email protected]

SaveOurWater.com | Drought.CA.gov

http://saveourwater.com/http://saveourwater.com/http://drought.ca.gov/

Serving Lake County Agriculture Since 1924

Lake County Farm Bureau 65 Soda Bay Road Lakeport, CA 95453 Phone (707) 263-0911 Fax (707) 263-1101 [email protected] www.lakecofb.com

LAK

E C

OU

NTY

FARM BUREAU

March 31, 2016 Peggy Barthel Associate Planner Community Development Department, Planning Division 255 N. Forbes Street Lakeport, CA 95453 RE: Draft Environmental Impact Report for Proposed Wild Diamond Vineyards Project. The Lake County Farm Bureau (LCFB) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Wild Diamond vineyard, winery and tasting room project on 15087 Spruce Grove Road in Middletown. LCFB acknowledges policies set forth by the California Farm Bureau Federation (CFBF) based on direction that begins at the local level to support agriculture and to address issues as they relate to the development and preservation of farm land. The LCFB also acknowledges the importance of economic development in the recovering communities of Hidden Valley Lake and Middletown. LCFB believes specifically that agricultural and vineyard development are important to the health and viability of Lake Countys economy. As administrator for the State Water Boards Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program in Lake County, the LCFB acknowledges the importance of best management practices (BMPs) to protect against erosion and water quality degradation in new agricultural developments. The LCFB generally supports agricultural development as long as BMPs are implemented to protect against soil/surface water run-off and the Lake County Grading Ordinance is adhered to. As the project is being developed on slopes with erosive volcanic soil, the LCFB strongly advocates that absolute diligence is taken to protect against soil erosion and surface water run-off in the development phase and that BMPs are put in place to protect against water quality degradation. As the project applicant proposes to use Erosion Control best management practices to retain sediment on the site and will be adhering to the Lake County Grading Ordinance, the Lake County Farm Bureau generally supports the proposed Wild Diamonds Vineyard project. Again, LCFB is grateful for the opportunity to provide preliminary comments on the application. We request notification of any actions or non-action that pertains to the potential project. Regards,

Brenna Sullivan Executive Director

Board of Directors

Dave Rosenthal President

Keith Brandt 1st Vice President

Robert Gayaldo 2nd Vice President

Daniel Suenram Treasurer

Craig Shannon Immediate Past President

Glenn Benjamin

Terry Dereniuk

Diane Henderson

Paul Lauenroth

Jeff Lyon

Dave Mostin

Greg Panella

Pat Scully

Rob Suenram

Brenna Sullivan Executive Director

From: Peggy BarthelTo: slreyesSubject: RE: Notice of Preparation 1 of 4Date: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 12:45:07 PM

Thank you Stephanie. I look forward to seeing you Thursday morning. Peggy Barthel707-263-2221 From: slreyes [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 12:43 PMTo: Peggy BarthelSubject: RE: Notice of Preparation 1 of 4 Peggy, Thank you for sending the information. As the project is within the ancestral lands of ourTribe we will be attending the the Scoping Meeting at 10am. We would like to continue toparticipate in all efforts of this project. Stephanie Reyes Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Middletown Rancheria Sent from my U.S. Cellular Smartphone-------- Original message --------From: Peggy Barthel Date: 3/14/2016 1:58 PM (GMT-08:00)To: Koi Nation , Middletown Rancheria, J Simon ,Slreyes , L Salazar, Sally Peterson, [email protected], [email protected], Sarah Ryan , Batsulwin Brown Subject: Notice of Preparation 1 of 4 Good Afternoon. This is the first in a series of four (4) emails that I am going to send in a row. The attacheddocuments are the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for theProposed Wild Diamond Vineyards Project. This NOP was sent by US Mail on March 1, 2016. It was brought to my attention that theMOA between the County and Tribes specified that the County will notify the Tribes withelectronic correspondence. Thank you.

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

Peggy BarthelAssistant Resource Planner707-263-2221


Date: March 16, 2016 To: Interested Parties From: Lake County Community Development Department Subject: Public Scoping Session for the Preparation a Draft Environmental Impact

Report for the Proposed Wild Diamond Vineyards Project Wild Diamond Vineyards, LLC (applicant) proposes to plant approximately 80 acres of new vineyards, construct a winery with the capacity to produce up to 52,800 cases of wine per year, build a wine tasting room that will be open to the public, and create an interpretive center. The property upon which the project is located encompasses approximately 323 acres with the development activities occurring on approximately 90 acres. The project site is located just north of the community of Hidden Valley Lake, approximately 1.3 miles east of State Route 29 and adjacent to Spruce Grove Road. The Project Location map is attached.

Documents Available for Public Review

The Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the EIR and the Application for Master Use Permit, Grading Permit and Lot Line Adjustment are available for public review at the following locations, during normal business hours:

Lake County Community Development Department 255 North Forbes Street, Third Floor Lakeport, CA 95453 Lake County Libraries (available at the following library locations) Lakeport Library 1425 N. High Street Lakeport, CA 95453 Redbud Library 14785 Burns Valley Road Clearlake, CA 95422

Middletown Library 21256 Washington Street Middletown, CA 95461 Upper Lake Library 310 Second Street Upper Lake, CA 95485

The NOP is also posted on the Lobby Board in the Lake County administrative center located at 255 North Forbes Street, First Floor, Lakeport, CA 95453.

Public Scoping Session Wild Diamond Vineyard Project March 15, 2016

Providing Comments

Interested parties may provide written comments related to the Project to Lake County within 30 days of the date of this NOP, as mandated by State law. Comments should be provided no later than 5 PM on March 31, 2016. Comments need to be addressed to:


General Public Scoping Meeting This meeting will be held in Middletown, California and will provide the public with an opportunity to hear an overview of the project and take public comment related to the development of the EIR.

Date: March 31, 2016 Time: 6:30 PM Location: Community Room, Middletown Library Address: 21256 Washington Street, Middletown, CA 95461

Project Mgr.

By Date




APN 13-060-04,07,09,10,11,& 1215-259.1

02/29/16NTS

CAM 02/29/2016

FEB. 29, 2016




SHEET:

# XXXXX/XX/XX

SHEET NUMBER: OF 4

16-259.1

REVISIONS:-

USE

PER

MIT

APP

LIC

ATIO

NW

ILD

DIA

MO

ND

VIN

EYAR

DS

1508

7, 1

5807

, 156

63 &

155

91 S

PRU

CE

GR

OVE

RO

ADM

IDD

LETO

WN

, CAL

IFO

RN

IA

APN

013

-060

-04,

07,

09,

10,

11,

& 1

2

PREL

IMIN

ARY

- FO

R R

EVIE

W O

NLY

1UP1

CAMRRH

1"=200'

OVE

RAL

L SI

TE P

LAN

From: Peggy BarthelTo: Paul DoyonCc: Elizabeth MontgomerySubject: RE: Please Sign This Petition: "WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD: WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD, DO NOT

CONTAMINATE HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE WITH TOXIC PESTICIDES"Date: Monday, April 04, 2016 8:25:04 AM

Thank you for your comments. They will be considered in the preparation of the proposedprojects Environmental Impact Report. Peggy Barthel707-263-2221 From: Paul Doyon [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2016 5:55 PMTo: Peggy BarthelCc: Elizabeth MontgomerySubject: Please Sign This Petition: "WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD: WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD, DO NOTCONTAMINATE HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE WITH TOXIC PESTICIDES" Hi Peggy, I made this petition a year ago asking Wild Diamond Vineyards to go Organic with theirproposed vineyard and winery after all everyone loves "Organic" and it would be a win-win situation for everyone: no pesticides seeping into our groundwater, healthy organic wine,and higher profits and a better image for the winery with their claim to be "good neighbors."I don't think it is too much to ask. Warm regards, Paul DoyonHidden Valley Lake Resident

"WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD: WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD, DO NOTCONTAMINATE HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE WITH TOXIC PESTICIDES"

Hello!

I've started the petition "WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD: WILD DIAMOND VINEYARD, DONOT CONTAMINATE HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE WITH TOXIC PESTICIDES" and need yourhelp to get it off the ground.

Will you take 30 seconds to sign it right now? Here's the link:

http://www.change.org/p/wild-diamond-vineyard-wild-diamond-vineyard-do-not-contaminate-hidden-valley-lake-with-toxic-pesticides

Here's why it's important:

To Wild Diamond Vineyard

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://email.change.org/mpss/c/iAA/SCE/t.1ma/XeD3u4O5QsSGXQ8SRGMUtQ/h5/W9oZwjoGX5ulRlet7FB-2BvDKLxDwsF5f5yvWhj3-2BrOM5dd6b18i0vX0hqma084KQu2dN0Wc7L8OB-2FO7ngdppZXbzBgFFoT0f7u02Bg4QTxasVvc2lT6DITaqXEgDfDzYxaIHLSrXiKkpBNm0pz1qMpZ8Ya-2FqB-2BfSVrHCNrk7EGmv9zDvSlMgGIEXoD1vjKR7gWfJmHvL-2Bhl56-2BKXRdA9A3Fxmrpg4Ix56S1DuaKv-2FnZo3-2FsQtM-2FdyoAHceJ5v9mCzhttp://email.change.org/mpss/c/iAA/SCE/t.1ma/XeD3u4O5QsSGXQ8SRGMUtQ/h5/W9oZwjoGX5ulRlet7FB-2BvDKLxDwsF5f5yvWhj3-2BrOM5dd6b18i0vX0hqma084KQu2dN0Wc7L8OB-2FO7ngdppZXbzBgFFoT0f7u02Bg4QTxasVvc2lT6DITaqXEgDfDzYxaIHLSrXiKkpBNm0pz1qMpZ8Ya-2FqB-2BfSVrHCNrk7EGmv9zDvSlMgGIEXoD1vjKR7gWfJmHvL-2Bhl56-2BKXRdA9A3Fxmrpg4Ix56S1DuaKv-2FnZo3-2FsQtM-2FdyoAHceJ5v9mCz

From HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE and Surrounding Area Residents

We, the residents of Hidden Valley Lake and its surrounding areas, would like to seek a win-winsolution with Wild Diamond Vineyard by requesting that they be good neighbors in making theirnew 40-acre vineyard combined with the already approved 68-acre vineyard (for a total of 108acres) insecticide- and herbicide-free (i.e. organic) and not contaminate our lake and surroundingareas by spraying toxic insecticides and herbicides.

While we support the American entrepreneurial spirit exemplified by Wild Diamond Vineyardswith its freedom to approach, we also acknowledge that this needs to be balanced with the needto protect our health and environment with a freedom from approach with regard to exposures toharmful substances.

We would like to request that Wild Diamond Vineyards adopt a more holistic and sustainableapproach (i.e. organic) in managing their vineyard, for the benefit of our environment, ourwatersheds, our animals, and our own health.

Why is this important?

Monsanto and the other Biotech Bullies are responsible for the creation of toxic substanceslike Agent Orange, PCBs, Roundup (glyphosate) and other toxins shown to threaten human healthand the health of the environment. For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate agribusinesshave exercised near-dictatorial control over American agriculture. With increasing education,however, public opinion regarding the biotech industry's contamination of our food supply anddestruction of our environment is reaching a tipping point. An increasing number of concernedcitizens are fighting back.

Pesticides like Roundups active ingredient glyphosate which Wild Diamond Vineyards intendsto use have been scientifically shown to be toxic to humans, animals, soils, earthworms, andamphibians. We need to protect our watersheds, our air quality, and Hidden Valley Lake fromcontamination by this and other toxic chemicals.

The World Health Organizations (WHO) panel of cancer experts, publishing its latest review ofthe cancer risks of glyphosate on March 20, 2015, classified glyphosate, the main ingredient inMonsantos Roundup herbicide, as a Group 2A carcinogen, meaning that it is probablycarcinogenic to humans. This chemical is also currently under review by the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) which has the power to ban glyphosate in Roundup or any otherproduct.

For this reason, we ask that Wild Diamond Vineyards be good neighbors by joining in with thenumerous other organic and biodynamic vineyards in the area that have decided to protect ourhealth and the health of the environment by not using these toxic chemicals in the production oftheir wines.

You can sign my petition by clicking here.

Thanks!

http://email.change.org/mpss/c/iAA/SCE/t.1ma/XeD3u4O5QsSGXQ8SRGMUtQ/h6/W9oZwjoGX5ulRlet7FB-2BvDKLxDwsF5f5yvWhj3-2BrOM5dd6b18i0vX0hqma084KQu2dN0Wc7L8OB-2FO7ngdppZXbzBgFFoT0f7u02Bg4QTxasVvc2lT6DITaqXEgDfDzYxaIHLSrXiKkpBNm0pz1qMpZ8Ya-2FqB-2BfSVrHCNrk7EGmv9zDvSlMgGIEXoD1vjKR7gWfJmHvL-2Bhl56-2BKXRdA9A3Fxmrpg4Ix56S1DuaKv-2FnZo3-2FsQtM-2FdyoAHceJ5v9mCz

Paul Doyon

--Paul DoyonMAT (TESOL), SIT Graduate Institute | MA Advanced Japanese Studies, University of Sheffield | BAPsychology, University of California, Santa Cruz | http://www.linkedin.com/pub/paul-doyon/7/863/ab9http://independent.academia.edu/PaulDoyonhttp://www.slideshare.net/doyonpaul

Sent From a Hard-wired Computer -- for our Health!

"In the beginner's mind, there are many possibilities; in the expert's mind there are few." - Shunyu Suzuki

As learners, engaged in this process of knowledge creation, we are alternatively enticed into a dogmatic embrace of ourcurrent convictions and threatened with utter skepticism as what we thought were adamantine crystals of truth dissolve likefine sand between our grasping fingers. The posture of partial skepticism, of what Perry (1970) calls commitment withinrelativism, that is needed to openly confront the conflict inherent in the dialectic process is difficult to maintain. Thegreatest challenge to the development of knowledge is the comfort of dogmatism - the security provided by unquestionedconfidence in a statement of truth, or in a method of achieving truth - or even the shadow dogmatism ofutter skepticism (for to be utterly skeptical is to dogmatically affirm that nothing can be known)... - David Kolb

"To be a teacher does not mean simply to affirm that such a thing is so, or to deliver a lecture, etc. No, to be a teacher inthe right sense is to be a learner. Instruction begins when you, the teacher, learn from the learner, put yourself in his(/her)place so that you may understand what he (/she) understands and the way he (/she) understands it." - Sren Kierkegaard

--Paul Doyon | MAT / MA / BA / BBP /http://www.linkedin.com/pub/paul-doyon/7/863/ab9http://independent.academia.edu/PaulDoyonhttp://www.slideshare.net/doyonpaul

The best revenge is massive success. - Frank Sinatra

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/paul-doyon/7/863/ab9http://independent.academia.edu/PaulDoyonhttp://www.slideshare.net/doyonpaulhttp://www.linkedin.com/pub/paul-doyon/7/863/ab9http://independent.academia.edu/PaulDoyonhttp://www.slideshare.net/doyonpaul

From: Peggy BarthelTo: Thomas NickelSubject: RE: hidden valley vineyard outrageDate: Friday, March 25, 2016 8:38:28 AMAttachments: Public Scoping Session.pdf

Mr. Nickel,

I assure you we have made every attempt to be anything but sneaky in processing this application. OnFebruary 29, a Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report was submitted to the State ofCalifornia, which is recorded here:

http://www.ceqanet.ca.gov/ProjDocList.asp?ProjectPK=644657

The Notice of Preparation was also mailed to neighboring property owners. An additional notice wassent to property owners specifically announcing a Public Scoping Session to provide the public with anopportunity to hear an overview of the proposed project and take public comment related to thedevelopment of the Environmental Impact Report. I am attaching a copy of that notice in this email. Additionally, notice of this Scoping Session will be published in the Record-Bee on March 26.

The County has not permitted any work to be done for this proposed project. We are in the beginningstages of analyzing the project.

As for other areas, vineyards are an allowed agricultural use in most zoning districts in the County. They are not required to receive County permission. I am not aware of water being stolen from creeks,and the County has no jurisdiction to control aquifer use. I personally have processed grading permitsto clear land for vineyard use, in which wildlife corridors have specifically been required as a conditionof grading, as well as extensive erosion control measures. I recommend you contact both theAgricultural Commissioner and the Board of Supervisors with your concerns regarding vineyarddevelopment, as the Community Development Department Staff is adhering to the currently-adoptedordinances.

Peggy Barthel707-263-2221

-----Original Message-----From: Thomas Nickel [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 2:17 PMTo: Peggy BarthelSubject: hidden valley vineyard outrage

dear peggy. i just read a article in the letters to the editor of the record bee this morning regarding thesneaky vineyard expansion in the hidden valley lake area. this is nothing short of an outrage for thiscounty to permit this. vineyards seem to get carte blanche in this county with out much over site to theenvironment and our aquifers. this has to stop. if this article is true this county is in trouble. this hashappened before with a vineyard increasing is acreage with out planning permission. vineyards arestealing water out of the creeks in kville area. vineyards are out of control. until we get out of thisdrought there should be a moratorium on vineyards. this county is very lacks about vineyards increasingat a alarming rate. there are no wildlife corridors amongst these vineyards. very little erosion controlswith nutrient loading in this lake and depleting our aquifers. my friends well is going dry because of thevineyard next to his property in kville. if the county continues this and residences wells dry up there isgoing to be hell to pay.thanks thomas nickelscotts valley water conservation district director.

Sent from my iPhone
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.ceqanet.ca.gov/ProjDocList.asp?ProjectPK=644657mailto:[email protected]


Date: March 16, 2016 To: Interested Parties From: Lake County Community Development Department Subject: Public Scoping Session for the Preparation a Draft Environmental Impact

Report for the Proposed Wild Diamond Vineyards Project Wild Diamond Vineyards, LLC (applicant) proposes to plant approximately 80 acres of new vineyards, construct a winery with the capacity to produce up to 52,800 cases of wine per year, build a wine tasting room that will be open to the public, and create an interpretive center. The property upon which the project is located encompasses approximately 323 acres with the development activities occurring on approximately 90 acres. The project site is located just north of the community of Hidden Valley Lake, approximately 1.3 miles east of State Route 29 and adjacent to Spruce Grove Road. The Project Location map is attached.

Documents Available for Public Review

The Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the EIR and the Application for Master Use Permit, Grading Permit and Lot Line Adjustment are available for public review at the following locations, during normal business hours:

Lake County Community Development Department 255 North Forbes Street, Third Floor Lakeport, CA 95453 Lake County Libraries (available at the following library locations) Lakeport Library 1425 N. High Street Lakeport, CA 95453 Redbud Library 14785 Burns Valley Road Clearlake, CA 95422

Middletown Library 21256 Washington Street Middletown, CA 95461 Upper Lake Library 310 Second Street Upper Lake, CA 95485

The NOP is also posted on the Lobby Board in the Lake County administrative center located at 255 North Forbes Street, First Floor, Lakeport, CA 95453.

Public Scoping Session Wild Diamond Vineyard Project March 15, 2016

Providing Comments

Interested parties may provide written comments related to the Project to Lake County within 30 days of the date of this NOP, as mandated by State law. Comments should be provided no later than 5 PM on March 31, 2016. Comments need to be addressed to:


General Public Scoping Meeting This meeting will be held in Middletown, California and will provide the public with an opportunity to hear an overview of the project and take public comment related to the development of the EIR.

Date: March 31, 2016 Time: 6:30 PM Location: Community Room, Middletown Library Address: 21256 Washington Street, Middletown, CA 95461

Project Mgr.

By Date




APN 13-060-04,07,09,10,11,& 1215-259.1

02/29/16NTS

CAM 02/29/2016

FEB. 29, 2016




SHEET:

# XXXXX/XX/XX

SHEET NUMBER: OF 4

16-259.1

REVISIONS:-

USE

PER

MIT

APP

LIC

ATIO

NW

ILD

DIA

MO

ND

VIN

EYAR

DS

1508

7, 1

5807

, 156

63 &

155

91 S

PRU

CE

GR

OVE

RO

ADM

IDD

LETO

WN

, CAL

IFO

RN

IA

APN

013

-060

-04,

07,

09,

10,

11,

& 1

2

PREL

IMIN

ARY

- FO

R R

EVIE

W O

NLY

1UP1

CAMRRH

1"=200'

OVE

RAL

L SI

TE P

LAN

From: Peggy BarthelTo: Thomas NickelSubject: RE: hidden valley vineyard outrageDate: Friday, March 25, 2016 10:59:40 AMAttachments: IS14-32 Thurston Red Lava Vineyard.pdf

I understand that you have concerns. Please see the document I have attached. It is an example of arecent California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for a grading project. Please note thatseveral of your concerns are discussed in this document and mitigation measures were identified asenvironmental protection measures. The Community Development Staff strives to evaluate each projectthoroughly.

Many of the topics of your email are not within the jurisdiction of the Community DevelopmentDepartment. As I stated in my prior email, you may wish to contact both the Agricultural Commissionerand the Board of Supervisors with your concerns regarding vineyard development, as the CommunityDevelopment Department Staff is adhering to the currently-adopted ordinances. Additionally, theEnvironmental Health Department is the Agency that issues well drilling permits.

I also encourage you to attend the Public Scoping Session on March 31.

Peggy Barthel707-263-2221

-----Original Message-----From: Thomas Nickel [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 9:54 AMTo: Peggy BarthelSubject: Re: hidden valley vineyard outrage

peggy thank you for your prompt response. there is going to be a meeting next week with the hiddenvalley home owners to discuss this matter. i am planning to go to it learn more facts in the matter. weare going to find out. there will probably be a activists group (wine, water, watch) there to discuss theproblems that excessive vineyard expansion causes. this is not the first time a vineyard owner has snuckin more acreage, so it does not surprise me at all that this maybe happening again. according to thisarticle in the paper this vineyard owner has drilled more wells than planned for. vine rows areperpendicular to the hidden valley lake. not sound erosion control. if there is no cover crop betweenrows that again is not sound erosion control. there are vineyards on this lake that are closer than 100ft, again not sound erosion control. i would like to view any of the counties plans for vineyardsregarding wild life corridors and erosion controls cause frankly i dont see any. you may wish to viewsonoma and napa counties stricter erosion control measures (v.e.s.c.o.) which lake county does nothave. as far as stealing water you need to speak with sara ryan from big valley environmental regardingthat fact. she has caught them doing it. you need to realize that these vineyard developers are nothingmore than carpetbaggers from other counties, states and countries here to exploit are resources, mainlywater and cheap land. sound planning would be that his county should diversify the crops grown here.if a catastrophe should occur to vineyards this county would loose all there ag tax revenue. napa has toimport almost every other type of food crop because nothing is locally grown there. we dont need winegrapes to sustain human life be advised that a bottle of wine takes 30 gals of water from start to finish to produce. this countyneeds to implement a moratorium on vineyards until we at lease get out of this drought event. like isaid my friend in kville area well is going dry since a vineyard was planted next to him recently. if thiscontinues this county is going to have water wars and your planning dept is going to be in the middle ofit. the right to farm act does not give anyone the right to take every available resource. one lastquestion. is it lake co plan to cover every square foot of land with grapes and let every drop of waterbe sucked out of the ground and lake?thank you thomas nickelscotts valley water conservation district director. Sent from my iPhone
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

October 23, 2015

California Environmental Quality Act

INITIAL STUDY IS 14-32

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

1. Project Title: Thurston Lake Red Lava Vineyard Grading Project

2. Permit Number: Complex Grading GR 14-016

3. Lead Agency Name and Address: County of Lake Community Development Department

Planning Division

Courthouse 255 North Forbes Street

Lakeport CA 95453

4. Contact Person and Phone Number: Peggy Barthel, Assistant Resource Planner (707) 263-2221

5. Project Location: 8200 S Highway 29, Lower Lake, CA; APN 009-006-75; Clearlake Highlands Quad, Section 35, T13N, R8W, M.D.M.

6. Project Sponsors Name and Address: Thurston Creek Vineyards LLC 13359 Point Lakeview Road

Lower Lake, CA 95457

7. General Plan Designation: Rural Lands

8. Zoning: RL Rural Lands

9. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional

sheets if necessary).

This project proposes to clear 61 acres of native vegetation on an 80-acre parcel at 8200 S Highway 29. The parcel

is zoned RL Rural Lands. Ultimately, the property owner plans to install approximately 55 acres of vineyard

adjacent to the seven-acre vineyard currently existing on the parcel. Section 21-7.3 of the Lake County Zoning

Ordinance permits agricultural uses, including crop farming, as a use by right. For a grading project of this size, the

Lake County Grading Ordinance requires approval of a complex grading permit, which in turn triggers

environmental review pursuant to CEQA. This CEQA review primarily addresses environmental impacts of

grading. However, because the project ultimately involves conversion of natural habitat to agricultural use, the

impacts of the proposed vineyard are also considered in this review.

Access to the parcel is from State Highway 29. There is currently no development on the property, other than a barn

and the existing seven acres of vineyard. Slopes range from 0% to 35%; the average slope is 24%. The planned

vineyard is designed with rows that run primarily up and down hill to preserve sheetflow runoff and recharge, and to

avoid areas of excessive flooding. Deer fence will be installed around the vineyard with a wildlife gate to allow exit

for deer that may accidentally enter the vineyard area.


2 of 23

Water for the vineyard will be provided by existing wells on the subject parcel and on the applicants nearby parcels

009-006-22 and 011-069-09, which cumulatively are developed with approximately 138 acres of vineyard and two

residences. Parcel 011-069-09 also contains a 14.5 acre-foot agricultural pond that is supplied by on-site wells.

Grading will also include rework to repair the existing steep slope to the west of the existing building. This rework

grading was approved by grading permit GR13-060 in May 2014.

Vineyard installation will include clearing, ripping, installing a drip irrigation system, trellising, planting, seeding,

and spreading straw mulch. Existing vegetation will be retained to the extent possible to prevent erosion. In

disturbed areas, straw mulch will control erosion, and fiber rolls and silt fences will contain sediment during

vineyard installation. Vegetative cover will control erosion after vineyard installation. All work is planned to occur

between April 15 and October 15.

10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the projects surroundings:

The project parcel is located in a rural area south of the community of Clearlake Riviera off California State Highway

29. Parcels zoned RL Rural Lands and containing native vegetation, and residential and agricultural uses surround

the project parcel to the north, south, east, and west. Adjacent parcels range from 21 acres to 446 acres in size. Three-

to five-acre parcels zoned R1 Single Family Residential are located approximately one mile to the north and

northwest.

11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.):

Caltrans

Lake County Air Quality Management District

Kelseyville Fire Protection District

Division of Environmental Health

Agricultural Commissioners Office

Lake County Department of Public Works, Water Resources Division

3 of 23

Project Location

Project Site Plan

4 of 23

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact

that is a Potentially Significant Impact as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Green House Gas Emissions Population / Housing

Agriculture & Forestry Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services

Air Quality Hydrology / Water Quality Recreation

Biological Resources Land Use / Planning Transportation / Traffic

Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Utilities / Service Systems

Geology / Soils Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance

DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project

proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a potentially significant impact or potentially significant unless

mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier

document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on

the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,

but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all

potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE

DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that

earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed

upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Initial Study prepared by:

Peggy Barthel, Assistant Resource Planner

Date:

SIGNATURE

Richard Coel, Director

Community Development Department

5 of 23

SECTION 1

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:

1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported

by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"

answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not

apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"

answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,

the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative

as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, and then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or

less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an

effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the

determination is made, an EIR is required.

4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less

Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how

they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier

Analyses," may be cross-referenced).

5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect

has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this

case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the

scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,

and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier

analysis.

c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures

Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the

earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for

potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside

document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is

substantiated.

7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental

effects in whatever format is selected.

9) The explanation of each issue should identify:

a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

6 of 23

KEY: 1 = Potentially Significant Impact

2 = Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation

3 = Less Than Significant Impact

4 = No Impact

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3

4 All determinations need explanation.

Reference to documentation, sources, notes and correspondence.

Source

Number**

I. AESTHETICS

Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse

effect on a scenic vista?

X The project is not located in view of a scenic vista. 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 7

b) Substantially damage scenic

resources, including, but not

limited to, trees, rock

outcroppings, and historic

buildings within a state scenic

highway?

X No scenic resources will be disturbed within a state scenic highway. The site is

located approximately mile from State Hwy 29. Although Highway 29 is a

designated scenic corridor by the Lake County General Plan, it is not

considered a state scenic highway. The parcels located between the highway

and the proposed vineyard are developed with vineyards.

Grading to remove brush and other native vegetation during vineyard

development can have an adverse effect to a scenic view. However, the site

development process is temporary and will have no long term impacts.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 7

c) Substantially degrade the

existing visual character or

quality of the site and its

surroundings?

X Vineyard plantings at this site will not detract from the rural landscape. The

parcels located between the highway and the proposed project are developed

with vineyards. The grading process is temporary and will have no long-term

impacts.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 7

d) Create a new source of

substantial light or glare which

would adversely affect day or

nighttime views in the area?

X The project is not anticipated to create additional light or glare. There is no

proposed nighttime work that would involve lighting.

1, 2 3, 4, 5,

6

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California

Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in

assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant

environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the

states inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon

measurement methodology provided in Forest protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

a) Convert Prime Farmland,

Unique Farmland, or Farmland

of Statewide Importance

(Farmland), as shown on the

maps prepared pursuant to the

Farmland Mapping and

Monitoring Program of the

California Resources Agency, to

non-agricultural use?

X This project will enhance agricultural uses in the area. The project area is

designated as Other Land by the Lake County Important Farmland 2006 Map.

Other Land is defined as Land not included in any other mapping category.

Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber,

wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined

livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water

bodies smaller than 40 acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on

all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as Other

Land.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 9,

10

b) Conflict with existing zoning

for agricultural use, or a

Williamson Act contract?

X See response to Section II (a). 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 9,

10

c) Conflict with existing zoning

for, or cause rezoning of, forest

land (as defined in Public

Resources Code section

12220(g)), timberland (as defined

by Public Resources Code section

4526), or timberland zoned

Timberland Production (as

defined by Government Code

section 51104(g))?

X This property is zoned RL Rural Lands. The proposed vineyard

development is consistent with the RL zoning district. The General Plan

designation is Rural Lands. Agriculture is an appropriate activity within the

Rural Lands designation. The project would not result in the rezone of forest

land, timber land, or Timberland Production lands.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 9,

10

7 of 23

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3



Source

Number**

d) Result in the loss of forest

land or conversion of forest land

to non-forest use?

X The project would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land to a non-

forest use.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 9,

10

e) Involve other changes in the

existing environment which, due

to their location or nature, could

result in conversion of Farmland,

to non-agricultural use or

conversion of forest land to non-

forest use?

X The project will not induce changes to existing farmland that would result in its

conversion to non-agricultural use.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 9,

10

III. AIR QUALITY

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon

to make the following determinations. Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct

implementation of the applicable

air quality plan?

X The project has the potential to result in short- and long-term air quality

impacts. Dust and fumes may be released as a result of grading, and planting

activities primarily during vineyard development. Post-development vehicle

traffic on dirt vineyard roads may create fugitive dust and impact air quality.

Smoke from the burning of brush removed during grading can have a

substantial effect on air quality. Lake County Air Quality Management District

(LCAQMD) recommends that removed vegetation be chipped and spread for

ground cover and erosion control as an alternative to vegetation burning.

Mitigation: Work practices shall minimize vehicular and fugitive dust

during grading and vineyard development and management to reduce

the impact of fugitive dust emissions to a less than significant level in

staging areas, work areas, and adjoining roads by use of water, paving or

other acceptable dust palliatives to maintain two inches of visibly-moist soil in the project area and to ensure that dust does not leave the

property. Access to project areas shall be limited to authorized vehicles.

In the event that substantive dust complaints are received during

grading, the property owner shall adopt one or more of the following

methods of dust control:

Work during the night when wind is at a minimum

Spread straw mulch or bark on disturbed areas

Minimize the number of times the grading equipment passes over

each section.

Mitigation: Vehicles and equipment shall be well maintained and in

compliance with State emission requirements. LCAQMD permits are

required for any diesel generators or diesel engines installed as operating,

support, or emergency backup equipment.

Mitigation: Vegetation disposal shall be by chipping to the maximum

extent practical. If vegetation disposal is to be accomplished through

burning, agricultural burn permits are required. A burn plan including

a District Smoke Management Plan as approved by the LCAQMD will be

required prior to issuance of a burn permit. The Smoke Management

Plan should consider weather and wind conditions and multiple day

burns are discouraged. The permit holder shall contact the LCAQMD at

707-263-7000 to obtain required burn permits. If valid complaints are

received about the project, the permit holder shall take further measures

to minimize smoke and other vegetation burning impacts.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10, 11

b) Violate any air quality

standard or contribute

substantially to an existing or

projected air quality violation?

X See response to Section III (a). 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10, 11

8 of 23

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3



Source

Number**

c) Result in a cumulatively

considerable net increase of any

criteria pollutant for which the

project region is non-attainment

under and applicable federal or

state ambient air quality standard

(including releasing emissions,

which exceed quantitative

thresholds for ozone precursors)?

X The Lake County Air Basin is designated as an attainment area. No criteria

pollutants for the project region have been exceeded.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 10, 11

d) Expose sensitive receptors to

substantial pollutant

concentrations?

X The project is located in a rural area where the parcels to the north, east, and

south have agricultural and residential uses and range in size from 21 to 446

acres. The nearest resident is about one-quarter mile from the project area on a

parcel owned by the applicant. Another adjacent residence is about one-quarter

mile west of the project area. The nearest school is more than five air-miles

away from the project area.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10, 11

e) Create objectionable odors

affecting a substantial number of

people?

X Objectionable odors could be produced as a result of the application of

agricultural chemicals. The proposed project is located approximately one mile

from residential development. Compliance with requirements of the

Agricultural Commissioners Office regarding chemical application standards

should reduce nuisance odors, resulting in a less than significant impact.

Mitigation: The permit holder shall comply with all requirements of the

Agricultural Commissioners Office regarding chemical applications to

prevent over spray and reduce nuisance odors to a less than significant

level.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 10, 11

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse

effect, either directly or through

habitat modifications, on any

species identified as a candidate,

sensitive, or special status species

in local or regional plans,

policies, or regulations, or by the

California Department of Fish

and Game or U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service?

X The Biological Resource Assessment prepared for this project by Northwest

Biosurvey (September 2014) did not identify any plants or wildlife with

sensitive regulatory status on the subject parcel. Based on the steep slopes,

dense shrub habitats, and lack of nearby surface waters, the proposed vineyard

blocks do not serve as part of any local wildlife movement corridors. A 50-foot

corridor is provided in the northern portion of the parcel, as recommended by

the Biological Resource Assessment. Clearlake hitch have been identified in

Thurston Lake, approximately one mile away from the project site. No impact

is anticipated fro.m this project to the Clearlake hitch. A 500-foot corridor is

provided from Thurston Creek, which flows into Thurston Lake.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10,

12, 13, 14

b) Have a substantial adverse

effect on any riparian habitat or

other sensitive natural community

identified in local or regional

plans, policies, and regulations or

by the California Department of

Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service?

X The nearest mapped drainage is Thurston Creek, which flows toward the

southeast and is located approximately 200 feet to the north of the northeast

corner of project parcel. Removal of riparian vegetation is not proposed as part

of this project. The proposed vineyard will be at least 500 feet from the creek.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10,

12, 13, 14

c) Have a substantial adverse

effect on federally protected

wetlands as defined by Section

404 of the Clean Water Act

(including, not limited to, marsh,

vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through

direct removal, filling,

hydrological interruption, or other

means?

X There are no federally protected wetlands identified within the project area. 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10,

12, 13, 14

9 of 23

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3



Source

Number**

d) Interfere substantially with the

movement of any native resident

or migratory fish or wildlife

species or with established native

resident or migratory wildlife

corridors, or impede the use of

native wildlife nursery sites?

X Grading of native vegetation and the presence of deer fencing around

vineyards has the potential to inhibit the ability of wildlife to migrate

throughout their range. Deer fence will be installed around the vineyard with

a wildlife gate to allow exit for deer that may accidentally enter the vineyard.

A 50-foot corridor is provided in the northern portion of the parcel, as

recommended by the Biological Resource Assessment. A 500-foot corridor is

provided from Thurston Creek.

Mitigation: Use of deer fencing should be restricted to the planted

vineyard areas and sufficient surrounding strip to allow turning of

equipment. No fencing should be constructed along roadways or

property boundaries. All fencing that is placed around the planted areas

shall have gates at either end of the vineyard to allow trapped wildlife to

escape.

Mitigation: No recreational or sport hunting is allowed within the

planting area for the life of the agricultural project. Specific animals that

become or would become a detriment to the agricultural operation may

be hunted pursuant to Lake County and California Fish and Game

regulations, if the specific animal cannot safely be relocated out of the

agricultural area.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10,

12, 13, 14

e) Conflict with any local

policies or ordinances protecting

biological resources, such as a

tree preservation policy or

ordinance?

X The property is characterized by a mixture of oak trees, annual grass lands

and dense brush. Section 21083.4 of the California Public Resources Code

states that if a county determines that there may be a significant effect to oak

woodlands; mitigation measures must be put in place in order to alleviate the

impact created through the conversion of oak woodlands. Fifteen mature oak

trees will be removed for this project.

Mitigation: Three oak trees shall be planted to replace each mature oak

tree removed. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, an Oak Tree

Mitigation Plan shall be submitted to the Lake County Community

Development Department for review and approval. The plan shall

identify the location of the replacement oak trees and include provisions

for maintenance until permanent establishment is achieved.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10,

12, 13, 14

10 of 23

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3



Source

Number**

f) Conflict with the provisions of

an adopted Habitat Conservation

Plan, Natural Community

Conservation Plan, or other

approved local, regional, or state

habitat conservation plan?

X The project does not conflict with any established conservation plan. 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 10,

12, 13, 14

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES

Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse

change in the significance of a

historical resource as defined in

15064.5?

X A cultural resources survey was prepared by Archaeological Services, Inc. in

1999. No cultural resources were identified on the parcel.

Should any archaeological, paleontological, or cultural materials be

discovered during vineyard development, all activity shall be halted in the

vicinity of the find(s), and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the

find(s) and recommend mitigation procedures, if necessary, subject to the

approval of the Community Development Director. Should any human

remains be encountered, they shall be treated in accordance with Public

Resources Code Section 5097.98.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 7, 15

b) Cause a substantial adverse

change in the significance of an

archeological resource pursuant to

15064.5?

X See response to Section V (a). 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 7, 15

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a

unique paleontological resource

or site or unique geologic feature?


5, 6, 7, 15

d) Disturb any human remains,

including those interred outside of

formal cemeteries?


5, 6, 7, 15

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Would the project:

a) Expose people or structures to

potential substantial adverse

effects, including the risk of loss,

injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as

delineated on the most

recent Alquist- Priolo

Earthquake Fault Zoning

Map issued by the State

Geologist for the area or

based on other substantial

evidence of a known fault?

Refer to Division of Mines

and Geology Special

Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?

iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including

liquefaction?

iv) Landslides?

X Earthquake Faults

An Earthquake Fault Zone, as established by the California Geological Survey

in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, lies within

the eastern one-quarter of the parcel. The proposed project will not expose

people or structures to substantial adverse effects due to earthquakes.

Seismic Ground Shaking and SeismicRelated Ground Failure, including

liquefaction.

Lake County contains numerous known active faults. Future seismic events in

the Northern California region can be expected to produce seismic ground

shaking at the site. Risks related to ground shaking, ground failure, and

liquefaction will not be increased as a result of this project.

Landslides

According to the Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 16 prepared by the

California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, the

area is considered generally stable with a marginal landslide risk.

In recent years, grading was performed by the previous property owner on the

slope behind the existing building. A grading permit was issued in May 2014 to

correct the steep slope. the rework approved by that permit will take place at

the same time as the grading proposed by this project.

Mitigation: Grading shall include rework as approved by Grading Permit

GR13-060 to repair the existing steep slope to the west of the existing

building.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 17,

18, 19, 34

11 of 23

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3



Source

Number**

b) Result in substantial soil

erosion or the loss of topsoil?

X Grading activities associated with vineyard development have the potential to

result in substantial erosion and loss of topsoil. According to the soil survey of

Lake County, prepared by the U.S.D.A., the soil in the project area is Glenview-

Arrowhead Complex with 15-30% slopes (soil unit 139). The soils are on

volcanic hills and consist of cobbled to extremely gravelly sandy loam. The soil

is moderately to very deep and well-drained. In the Arrowhead soil hard,

fractured obsidian is found at a depth of about 31 inches. The permeability is

moderately slow and runoff is rapid; the hazard of erosion is severe. Obsidian

in soil unit 139 has a potential shredding effect on rubber tires.

Compliance with mitigation measures required as permit conditions of approval

requiring proper installation and ongoing maintenance of erosion control and

sedimentation prevention measures will reduce potential environmental impacts

to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: The project design shall incorporate appropriate Best

Management Practices (BMPs) in accordance with the Grading Ordinance

and the Erosion Control Plan dated April 29, 2015 to prevent or reduce

discharge of all vineyard installation or post-installation pollutants and

hazardous materials offsite. No silt, sediment or other materials exceeding

natural background levels shall be allowed to flow from the project area.

Natural background level is the level of erosion that currently occurs from

the area while in a state of undisturbed native vegetation.

Mitigation: The permit holder shall monitor the site during the rainy

season (October 15 -May 15), including post-installation, application of

BMPs, erosion control maintenance, and other improvements as needed.

In the event that the Community Development Department determines

that significant erosion is occurring at the site, the permit holder shall

implement additional erosion control measures as required.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 19,

34, 35

c) Be located on a geologic unit

or soil that is unstable, or that

would become unstable as a result

of the project, and potentially

result in on-site or off-site

landslide, lateral spreading,

subsidence, liquefaction or

collapse?

X According to the soil survey of Lake County, prepared by the U.S.D.A., the soil

at the site is considered generally stable and there is a less than significant

chance of landslide, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse as a result of the

project. However, improper earthwork resulting in erosion has the potential to

induce localized subsidence or earth movement. Proper grading and vineyard

installation and ongoing maintenance of erosion control and sedimentation

prevention measures would reduce potential environmental impacts to a less

than significant level.

Mitigation: See Mitigation Measures in Section VI (b).

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 17,

18, 19, 34,

35

d) Be located on expansive soil,

as defined in Table 18-1-B of the

Uniform Building Code (1994),

creating substantial risks to life or

property?

X The shrink-swell potential for the project soil type is low to moderate. There is

no risk to life or property from vineyard development.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8, 17,

18, 19, 34,

35

e) Have soils incapable of

adequately supporting the use of

septic tanks or alternative

wastewater disposal systems

where sewers are not available for

the disposal of waste water?

X No septic tanks are proposed or needed for the project. 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 6, 8

12 of 23

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3



Source

Number**

VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Would the project:

a) Generate greenhouse gas

emissions, either directly or

indirectly, that may have a

significant impact on the

environment?

X Air emissions will result from the use of standard grading and vineyard

installation equipment. Combustion engine emissions are anticipated to be

temporary and will not result in a significant impact to air quality standards.

During grading and vineyard installation, equipment will produce combustion

emissions including criteria pollutants. (Carbon Monoxide CO, Carbon

Dioxide - CO2, Nitrogen Dioxide NO2, Sulfur Dioxide SO2, and Particulate

Matter less than 2.5 and 10 microns PM2.5 & PM10). Ozone is not emitted

directly into the environment but is formed in the atmosphere by complex

chemical reactions between oxides of nitrogen and reactive organic gasses

(ROG) in the presence of sunlight. Ozone formation is greatest on warm,

windless, sunny days. The main sources of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and ROG,

often referred to as ozone precursors, are a result of combustion processes.

The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2013.2.2 air

quality monitoring software was utilized to estimate air emissions. This

software is designed to calculate air emissions from land use development based

on standard assumption for construction projects. Calculated air pollutants are

evaluated in comparison to Lake County Air Quality Management District

stationary source thresholds for new source permitting.

CalEEMod Summary Report for Annual Emissions (tons/year)

ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 CO2

Vineyard Installation Totals

0.25 1.92 1.13 0.00 0.74 0.26 182.03

Insignificant Source Thresholds

2 2 2 2 NE NE NE

Major Source Thresholds

50 50 100 100 70 NE NE

NE = Not established

This project is not anticipated to result in a violation of any air quality standards.

1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 11

b) Conflict with an applicable

plan, policy or regulation

adopted for the purpose of

reducing the emissions of

greenhouse gases?

X This project will not conflict with any adopted plans or policies for the reduction

of greenhouse gas emissions. 1, 2, 3, 4,

5, 11

13 of 23

IMPACT

CATEGORIES*

1

2

3



Source

Number**

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Would the project:

a) Create a significant hazard to

the public or the environment

through the routine transport, use,

or disposal of hazardous

materials?

X The proposed grading will not create an increased routine hazard for accidents

that could involve the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Materials associated with end-use vineyard operation, such as pesticides and

fertilizers, may be considered hazardous if released into the environment. The

use of chemicals should be in a manner consistent with law, limiting impacts to

a less than significant level.

Mitigation: The project design shall incorporate appropriate BMPs in

accordance with the Grading Ordinance and the Erosion Control Plan

dated April 29, 2015 to prevent or reduce discharge of all pollutants and

hazardous materials offsite.

Mitigation: The storage of potentially hazardous materials shall be

located at least 100 feet from any existing water well. These materials

shall not be allowed to leak onto the ground or contaminate surface

waters. Collected hazardous or toxic materials shall be recycled or

disposed of through a registered waste hauler to an approved site

legally authorized to accept such materials.

Mitigation: All equipment shall be maintained and operated in a manner

that minimizes any spill or leak of hazardous materials. Hazardous

materials and contaminated soil shall be stored, transported, and disposed

of consistent with applicable local, state and federal regulations.

Mitigation: The permit holder shall comply with the requirements of the

Agricultural

Wild Diamond Draft EIR Volume 2

Documents

Transcript of Wild Diamond Draft EIR Volume 2